Client Funds

Supreme Court

Inequitable Conduct: The Accusation That Could Change Your Life

Leave a Comment / Patent Ethics / By

Patent practitioners are keenly aware that inequitable conduct allegations are commonplace in patent litigation.  A finding of inequitable conduct has numerous adverse consequences for patent owners, including the possible loss of patent rights, exposure to antitrust claims, and an award of an accused infringer’s attorneys’ fees.  Because the impact of an inequitable conduct finding is […]

Inequitable Conduct: The Accusation That Could Change Your Life Read More »

Trademark Signature Best Practices and OED

Leave a Comment / Trademark Ethics, Trademark ethics, USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct / By

The letter comes in the mail from OED asking you a few questions about a handful of trademark applications, including whether each form was electronically signed by the respective applicant or attorney. The light bulb still has not hit—you ask yourself who is OED, and why are they asking about signatures. You read further into

Trademark Signature Best Practices and OED Read More »

Mixing Inventor And Patent Prosecutor Intent To Deceive: CleanTech Muddies Inequitable Conduct Law

Leave a Comment / Duty of Candor, Inequitable Conduct, IP Ethics, Patent Ethics / By

Inequitable conduct is supposed to be personal to each individual who owes a duty of disclosure to the USPTO. Thus, just because an inventor may have knowingly and intentionally lied to the USPTO does not mean that prosecution counsel did so as well. Indeed, most prosecutors are in a position where they must rely upon

Mixing Inventor And Patent Prosecutor Intent To Deceive: CleanTech Muddies Inequitable Conduct Law Read More »

USPTO Requires Patent Bar Applicants To Disclose Expunged Or Diverted Criminal Records

3 Comments / Patent Ethics / By

While in college, Joe Varsity is arrested for public intoxication. Joe pleads no contest, and the charge is dismissed after he completes an alcohol education class. Joe’s conviction is later expunged (or erased). Under the laws where Joe’s arrest occurred, “any person who shall have been the subject of such an erasure shall be deemed

USPTO Requires Patent Bar Applicants To Disclose Expunged Or Diverted Criminal Records Read More »

Federal Court DQs Law Firm in Patent Infringement Case, Rejecting Advance Conflict Waiver

Leave a Comment / Conflicts of Interest, IP Ethics, Legal Ethics, Litigation Ethics, Patent Ethics, Patent Litigation Ethics / By

A federal court in Alabama yesterday disqualified a law firm from representing a new client in a patent infringement case against a current firm client. In Southern Visions, LLP v. Red Diamond, Inc. (N.D. Ala. Feb. 26, 2019), the court held that Bradley Arant Boult Cummings (“Bradley”) was ethically barred from representing one client (Southern

Federal Court DQs Law Firm in Patent Infringement Case, Rejecting Advance Conflict Waiver Read More »

Colorado Supreme Court Shuts Down Sham “Expert” Patent Law Firm

2 Comments / IP Ethics, Lawyer Identity Theft, Legal Ethics, Patent Ethics, Unauthorized Practice of Law / By

On February 6, 2019, the Colorado Supreme Court shuttered a Colorado business, which once billed itself as an “expert patent law” firm, and its owner, for engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. According to the Court’s order (here), Intelligent Patent Services, LLC (IPS) and its non-lawyer owner, Dak Steiert, are enjoined from engaging in

Colorado Supreme Court Shuts Down Sham “Expert” Patent Law Firm Read More »

FAQs For IP Practitioners Who Receive A Request For Information and Evidence Under 37 CFR 11.22(f) From USPTO/OED

Leave a Comment / Patent Ethics / By

I am frequently contacted by patent and trademark practitioners who have been served with a “Request for Information and Evidence Under 37 C.F.R. 11.22(f)” from the Director of the Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO).   In Fiscal Year 2018, the OED Director issued over 100 such “Requests”

FAQs For IP Practitioners Who Receive A Request For Information and Evidence Under 37 CFR 11.22(f) From USPTO/OED Read More »

Scroll to Top